"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ...

<quoted text>I think if I have to pay for your medicare hip replacement that you should pay for someone's abortion. After all, the person you provide the abortion for is likely to be more productive than your retired asss, especially if not saddled with an unwanted child.

I paid for your grandmother's and your children and their children will pay for yours. That's how Democrats wanted it to be.

Of course, it won't be around long enough for someone to pay for yours.

You voted for the guy who didn't think it needed to be reformed so it would.

<quoted text>You would never be able to be a medical transcriptionist.This is a sample report of the kind of specialties I transcribed every day:http://alternativehealing.org/bone_marrow_bio...The first time a Chinese doctor with an accent began dictating this report, you'd go screaming into the streets.After 15 years, thankfully, I'm retired now.

<quoted text>A person making $50,000 would pay a $400 penalty while a couple earning that amount would each pay $300.Young healthy males between 21 and 29 will pay an expected premium increase of 56%. Males between 30 and 39 a 49% increase.http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/14/news/economy/...Which would you rather pay?

<quoted text>I paid for your grandmother's and your children and their children will pay for yours. That's how Democrats wanted it to be.Of course, it won't be around long enough for someone to pay for yours.You voted for the guy who didn't think it needed to be reformed so it would.

Putin looks like he doesn't pay attention to O'bama--he has the same look most of us have when O'bama speaks-blah blah blah blah blah blah. I am no one, other than you, O'bama butt kissing, liberals believe anything O'bama says.

Rupert Murdoch Fears That Bribery/Hacking Investigation Could “Kill The Corporation”

The Independent is reporting that Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp is under investigation as a “corporate suspect” over the charges that the company engaged in unlawful activities including bribery and hacking the phones, email, and computers of hundreds of politicians, celebrities and private citizens, including a missing schoolgirl who later turned up dead. The inquiry could have significant consequences for News Corp around the world including here in the U.S.

“The Independent has learnt the Metropolitan Police has opened an “active investigation” into the corporate liabilities of the UK newspaper group – recently rebranded News UK – which could have serious implications for the ability of its parent company News Corp to operate in the United States.”

That is not merely the opinion of the investigators and/or reporters. News Corp responded to the inquiry with an apocalyptic warning suggesting that thousands of innocents would suffer if the company were held responsible for its criminal behavior.

“A News Corp analysis of the effects of a corporate charge, produced in New York, said the consequences could ‘kill the corporation and 46,000 jobs would be in jeopardy’.

“Lawyers for the media behemoth have pleaded with the Met[tropolitan Police] and the Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute the company as it would not be in the ‘public interest’ to put thousands of jobs at risk.”

This attempt to turn employees into human shields notwithstanding, it would be unconscionable for the legal authorities to dismiss crimes because of potential adverse business results asserted by the criminal. That’s kind of like a bank president found guilty of embezzlement asking that his charges be dropped because the bad publicity might hurt the bank.

What’s more, there need not be a single job placed in jeopardy if the corporate offenders were brought to justice, removed from the company, and a properly instituted board of directors (e.g. one not beholden to the Murdoch regime) reformed the management and operations of the enterprise.

News Corp is, and has been, a criminal organization for many years. They are unapologetic about their abuse of the law and the public trust. It is encouraging that the British legal system is pursuing these charges, although in the past they have caved in to pressure from powerful business interests and retreated from doing the right thing. Time will tell if they have the integrity and fortitude to follow through on this matter.

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) appeared at a town hall in a local library in East Baton Rouge Parish on Thursday, where he made some news by saying he favored a complete shutdown of the US government over funding Obamacare.

Near the end of the event, Vitter responded to a audience member's criticism of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, with a comment of his own that veered awfully close to Mitt Romney's infamous "47 percent" moment, when he said at a private fundraiser that 47 percent of Americans were Obama-loving government mooches who wouldn't take responsibility for their lives.

Here's what Vitter had to say in response to a questioner's criticism of Obamacare:

The only thing I'd add is, I wish you were right that nobody wants Obamacare; that's not true. And in fact, the other side, who absolutely wants it, most of whom are getting something for nothing, came out in droves for the last election and our side sat at home.

Vitter didn't expand on what he meant by "getting something for nothing"—free health care? Free food? Free Obamaphones?—but the gist was clear enough. By "the other side," he means Obamacare supporters and also those people, most of them Democrats, who voted for President Obama last November. These Obama backers, Vitter seems to say, are mostly deadbeats living off the government.

There's been plenty written about how accusing Democrats of being government leeches, as Romney and now Vitter have, isn't fair or accurate. These kinds of comments also ignore the fact that Republicans rely on the welfare state, too. A recent Bloomberg News analysis found that Romney won 213 of the 254 counties in the United States where the number of food stamp recipients doubled from 2007 to 2011.

In Louisiana alone, 914,196 people receive food stamps. That's 20 percent of the state's population. Does Sen. Vitter think all of those people are Obama-loving government mooches?

As the U.S. economy recovers from the worst recession since the Great Depression, the explosive growth of food stamps remains a lingering legacy. And now the program comes with an irony, as the Republicans seeking to cut it also represent vast numbers of recipients.

Among the 254 counties where food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Republican Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last year’s presidential election, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data compiled by Bloomberg. Kentucky’s Owsley County, which backed Romney with 81 percent of its vote, has the largest proportion of food stamp recipients among those that he carried.

As the U.S. economy recovers from the worst recession since the Great Depression, the explosive growth of food stamps remains a lingering legacy. And now the program comes with an irony, as the Republicans seeking to cut it also represent vast numbers of recipients.Among the 254 counties where food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Republican Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last year’s presidential election, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data compiled by Bloomberg. Kentucky’s Owsley County, which backed Romney with 81 percent of its vote, has the largest proportion of food stamp recipients among those that he carried.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-14/food...yes, redneck republicans who are on food stamps voted for a republican.and what were they thinking?

I know you can't fix stupid, but I can at least point it out,

You got it wrong, snack shack, it was because the people with jobs in those counties noticed how many parasites they are having to paying for.

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) appeared at a town hall in a local library in East Baton Rouge Parish on Thursday, where he made some news by saying he favored a complete shutdown of the US government over funding Obamacare.Near the end of the event, Vitter responded to a audience member's criticism of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, with a comment of his own that veered awfully close to Mitt Romney's infamous "47 percent" moment, when he said at a private fundraiser that 47 percent of Americans were Obama-loving government mooches who wouldn't take responsibility for their lives.Here's what Vitter had to say in response to a questioner's criticism of Obamacare:The only thing I'd add is, I wish you were right that nobody wants Obamacare; that's not true. And in fact, the other side, who absolutely wants it, most of whom are getting something for nothing, came out in droves for the last election and our side sat at home.Vitter didn't expand on what he meant by "getting something for nothing"—free health care? Free food? Free Obamaphones?—but the gist was clear enough. By "the other side," he means Obamacare supporters and also those people, most of them Democrats, who voted for President Obama last November. These Obama backers, Vitter seems to say, are mostly deadbeats living off the government.There's been plenty written about how accusing Democrats of being government leeches, as Romney and now Vitter have, isn't fair or accurate. These kinds of comments also ignore the fact that Republicans rely on the welfare state, too. A recent Bloomberg News analysis found that Romney won 213 of the 254 counties in the United States where the number of food stamp recipients doubled from 2007 to 2011.In Louisiana alone, 914,196 people receive food stamps. That's 20 percent of the state's population. Does Sen. Vitter think all of those people are Obama-loving government mooches?http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/08/david...

What you really want is for me to pay for the R teat sucklers...and you will pay for the D teat sucklers?

<quoted text>I have a deep seated disdain for the teabaggers and will continue to refer to them as such. All I've seen from so called "Taxed Enough Already" baggers is attacks on individual liberty. Abortion and gay marriage have ZERO to do with "Taxed Enough Already". They're a bunch of phony christian right-wingers pretending to have a political ethic. If they were really "Taxed Enough Already" they'd have joined the extant Libertarian Party.They didn't 'cause they're liars.Most common reasons I've heard why they don't go LP: the LP doesn't support US Imperialism and doesn't want to legislate gay marriage or abortion rights.

Tenzing hates the tea party because even they won't join his wacko group. Its really too bad he doesn't do a better job of hiding his far leftwing leanings.

“Oh, you are sick of self-love, Malvolio, and taste with a distempered appetite. To be generous, guiltless, and of free disposition is to take those things for bird-bolts that you deem cannon-bullets. There is no slander in an allowed fool, though he do nothing but rail.”

<quoted text>Well, it all sounds so solvable when you put it that way. Why not just cut off the money, prosecute all drug and child support violations then you and I can just support a prison population of between 60 and 100 million.No problem.

Why not elect somebody who can bring jobs back by creating incentives for manufacturers, repealing Obamacare and getting government out of the way of the private sector?

The chance to do that came and went. We're now stuck in the same quagmire as we've been in the past four years and it's only going to get worse.

Hopefully, the getting worse part will be the silver lining to end the progressive liberal nonsense once and for all that is poisoning the nation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.